Toward an Optimal Observational Array for Improving Two Flavors of El Niño Predictions in the Whole Pacific
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper investigates the optimal observational array for improving the prediction of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) by exploring sensitive areas for target observations of two types of El Niño events in the whole Pacific. A target observation method based on the particle filter and pre-industrial control runs from six coupled model outputs in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) experiments are used to quantify the relative importance of the initial accuracy of sea surface temperature (SST) in different Pacific areas. The initial accuracy of the tropical Pacific, subtropical Pacific, and extratropical Pacific can all exert influences on both types of El Niño predictions. The relative importance of different areas changes along with different lead times of predictions. Tropical Pacific observations are crucial in decreasing the root mean square error of predictions of all lead times. Subtropical and extratropical observations play an important role in decreasing the prediction uncertainty, especially when the prediction is made before and throughout boreal spring. To consider different El Niño types and different start months for predictions, a quantitative frequency method based on frequency distribution is applied to determine the optimal observations of ENSO predictions. The final optimal observational array contains 31 grid points, including 21 grid points in the equatorial Pacific and 10 grid points in the north Pacific, suggesting the importance of the initial SST conditions for ENSO predictions not only in the tropical Pacific but also in the area outside the tropics. Furthermore, the predictions made by assimilating SST in sensitive areas have better prediction skills in the verification experiment, which can indicate the validity of the optimal observational array designed in this study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".